What if there are more than three dimensions in our universe? String theory suggests there are 11 of them. Let’s explore this intriguing theory and its possible applications.
Since ancient days, humans have been familiar with the sense of 3-dimensionality of space. This idea was better understood after the theory of classical mechanics by Isaac Newton was presented about 380 years ago.
This concept is now clear to everyone that space has three dimensions, meaning that for every position, there correspond three numbers with regards to a reference point that can direct one to the right location. In other words, one can define sequences of positions in three independent ways.
This fact has its trace not only in physics but in other aspects of our life such as the biology of every living creature. For example, the inner ear of almost all vertebrates is composed of exactly three semicircular canals that sense the position of the body in the three dimensions of space. The eye of every human too has three pairs of muscles by which the eye is moved to every direction.
Einstein’s special theory of relativity further developed this concept through its revolutionary idea that time should also be regarded as a 4th dimension. This notion was a must for the theory to resolves inconsistencies of Newtonian mechanics with classical electromagnetism.
Once a strange concept, after more than a century of its presentation, it is now a widely accepted concept in physics and astronomy. But still, one of the greatest mysteries and challenges of our era is the origin of the three dimensions of space, the origin of time as well as details of big bang why does space have three dimensions and not more?
This might be perhaps the most difficult question of physics.
Higher-dimensional space
The possibility of the existence of even higher dimensional space came about on the pure theoretical work of physicists who were trying to find a consistent and unified theory capable of explaining gravity within the framework of quantum mechanics.
Einstein’s general theory of relativity is a classical theory since it is valid only at large distances. It is capable of making its successful predictions such as retrogression movement of the planet mercury, bending of light beams passing by massive objects, black holes, and many similar phenomena at large distances.
However, it cannot be used at the quantum level since there is no quantum theory capable of explaining gravitational force.
Unification of fundamental interactions
It is known that there are four types of interactions in nature: strong and weak nuclear forces, electromagnetism, and gravity. The relative strength of these forces differs with the gravitational field being the weakest force in nature.
During the past 100 years, physicists have long dreamed of unifying all fundamental fields and units of matter into a single self-consistent model. In the late 1960s, Steven Weinberg and Abdus Salam managed to unify two of these fields, i.e., weak interactions and electromagnetic field in a genuine theory named electroweak.
The theory was later confirmed by its predictions. However, despite enormous efforts by physicists all over the world, there has been a little success for the unification of all four interactions into a single theory, with gravity being the most difficult one.
String theory and multidimensional space
In conventional quantum physics, elementary particles, such as electrons, quarks, etc., are regarded as mathematical points. This notion has been a long source of heated debate by physicist especially because of its deficiencies in dealing with gravity.
The general theory of relativity is incompatible with quantum field theory and numerous attempts to use a point-like particle model of quantum theory have failed to offer a consistent explanation of the gravitational field.
This was the time that string theory attracted a lot of attention aimed at finding a sound quantum theory for gravity. The way that string theory resolves the problem is by giving up the assumption that elementary particles are mathematical points and developing a quantum model of one-dimensional extended bodies named string.
This theory reconciles quantum theory and gravity. The theory once regarded as a purely theoretical conjecture is new regarded as one of the most consistent theories of quantum physics, promising a unified quantum theory of fundamental forces including gravity.
The theory was first suggested in the late 1960s to describe the behavior of particles called Hadrons and was later developed in the 1970s.
Since then, string theory has undergone many developments and changes. By the mid-1990s, the theory was developed in 5 different independent string theories, but in 1995, it was realized that all versions where different aspects of the same theory named M-theory (M for “membrane” or the “mother of all string theories”).
It has now become the focus of theoretical work for its success in explaining both gravity and the inside of an atom at the same time. One of the most important aspects of the theory is that it requires the 11-dimensional space with one time coordinate and 10 other spatial coordinates.
Testing and Experimental Results
The important question about M-theory is how it can be tested. In science fiction, extra dimensions are sometimes interpreted as alternate worlds, but these extra dimensions could simply be too small for us to feel and examine (on the order of 10-32 cm).
Since the M-theory is concerned about the most primitive entities of our universe, it is really a theory of Creation, and the only way to test it is to re-create the Big Bang itself at an experimental level. Other predictions of the theory that are to be tested include Super-symmetric particles, Extra dimensions, Microscopic black holes, and Cosmic strings.
Such an experiment needs a huge amount of input energy and speed that is beyond the present level of technology. However, it is expected that in the coming years, the new LHC (Large Hadron Collider) at CERN could test some of these predictions for the first time, providing more clues to the multi-dimensionality of our universe. If the attempt is successful, then the M-theory may give answers to the following fundamental questions:
- How did the universe begin?
- What are its fundamental constituents?
- What are the laws of Nature that govern these constituents?
Conclusion
As of now, there are no definite empirical results confirming M-theory and its 11-dimensional space, and the verification of the theory is a great challenge for physicists.
There is even a new theory called F-theory (F for “father”) that introduces another dimension, suggesting a 12-dimensional space with two-time coordinates instead of one!
The renowned physicist John Schwartz has even gone further by saying that there may be no fixed dimension for the final version of M-theory, making it independent of any dimensionality of space-time. Finding the real theory needs much more time and effort and till then the multi-dimensionality of the universe is an open case.
As the physicist Gregory Landsberg said if the tests are successful, “This would be the most exciting thing since humanity discovered the Earth is not flat. It would give us a whole new reality to look at, a whole new universe.”
References:
- http://einstein.stanford.edu
- Introduction to M-theory
- Eleven Dimensions of the Unifying Theory by Michael Duff (Jan.14, 2009)
Ok string theory IS actually either incomplete or just plan wrong! There is 18dimesions in this universe and here they are this has long been know/ lost in history The first dimension is “length.” The second, “breadth.” The third, “thickness.” The fourth, “duration,” or “time.” The fifth, “sex.” The sixth, “pressures.” The seventh, “potentials.” The eighth, “temperature.” The ninth, “ionization.” The tenth, “crYstallization.” The eleventh, “valence.” The twelfth, “axial rotation.” The thirteenth, “orbital revolution.” The fourteenth, “mass.” The fifteenth, “color.” The sixteenth, “plane.” The seventeenth, “tone.” The eighteenth, “ecliptic.”
Einstein said, “It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience.” To that end, I’m going to ask here: What *is* the charge on a subatomic particle? Google it and you’ll find that nobody really seems to know. I propose that it’s simply a reflection of the direction in time that a particle is traveling, based on entropy. Is the entropy of that particle like watching the break on a pool table rack where all the balls come apart from each other randomly? Or is it like watching all the randomly placed balls on a pool table spontaneously reassemble themselves into a racked triangle? Consider the following: When a positron collides with an electron, their charges and mass cancel each other out and the result is a photon. Look at the same event from outside of time, where you can see the planet lines of “each” particle. What you’ll see is *one* line, representing the different vectors of “each” particle, directly affected by the vector of the photon. The photon impacts the particle line, is absorbed, and reverses the direction in time that the “particle” is going. Now it’s easy to see that the positron and the electron were the same particle all along. Physicists seem to have lost touch with the old saying that “curiosity killed the cat”. Be careful about looking for knowledge in an irresponsible manner. Either you’re going to learn something that you’ll wish you’d never let out of that Pandora’s box, or else you’re going to destroy reality. A taste of this possibility was when the idiots who made the atomic bombs permanently polluted our planet with massive amounts of radioactive cesium, strontium, plutonium. They engaged in what amounted to basically a prolonged nuclear war against Utah, Nevada, New Mexico, etc. There are still nuclear test areas you couldn’t pay me enough money to travel through. Another place I won’t go near is Hanford, Washington, home of the breeder reactor used to make plutonium. A relative of mine lived in Pasco, WA (only a few miles downstream from Hanford) for a few years. When he moved back, shortly thereafter he came down with thyroid cancer and lymphomas. What I’m trying to say here, is that IMO, physicists and their unbridled curiosity in making the LHC at CERN need to be stopped and that piece of equipment needs to be torn down.
By the way, I came to this website hoping to learn more about the proposed dimension of “scale”. Maybe that could be considered as a dimension as well.
Well here’s my take on dimensions. I’m speaking from experience.
A dimension is an experience of space. It is not a place or a time. It is a frequency of a higher vibration. The higher the vibration the higher the dimension. One can only experience other dimensions according to their comprehension of “no time”. Present moment awareness is the doorway to higher dimensions. Only “now” exists. The fact that time does not exist except in one’s mind should erase the theory of a time dimension or the need to label dimensions at all.
It’s apparent that the Creator of all things is defined by a triune GOD, comprised of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Like his Creation is comprised of the Body, Soul and Spirit. Time is eternal, there is a time of an end, but not an end of time. You can find a reference to Quatum Physics in the Bible.
Ecc 3:15 That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past.
I disagree with 2 of your points. The Creator is not triune. That concept is derived from pagan belief systems. The Creator is 1, singular, whole, complete. He is not multiplicious (Colossians 2:9). Triune, co-equal, etc. assumes there is a division, break, or difference in God. If that were true, God would no longer be God. God is outside of time, nor bound to it. My second point: Time is not eternal. If time were eternal, it would not be called time. Time is a construct within mortality. If what you are saying is true, time would be infinite, but not eternal. Eternal consists of infinity before time, through time, and infinity beyond time.
This 4th plane could also wrap around the other three related planes like the 4th dimension wraps around the other three related dimensions.
I named them planes because I had nothing else in mind. Universe was already used, reality was also used(real/complex/imaginary).
PS: If you think of the way the four planes arrange themselves as similar to how the 1 s and 3 p subshells of an atom, when merged into 3 sp2 and 1 p, which split themselves to 1/2 p, sp2, sp2, sp2, 1/2 p, then maybe you might find something interesting!
If 3 dimensions make one plane, 4 planes makes one…universe I guess, then maybe there 5 nests(one in another) of universes, each universe containing infinity^11(for each dimension) other smaller ones. If each mini- universe is expanding, meaning it generates space, then maybe that space leaks through the infinite(but very small) border that block our universe from theirs. If infinity of those mini-universes are all leaking out tiny amounts of space, then that would also cause the expansion of our universe. This is a wild shot, but what if dark matter is are just clumps of these “white-hole” universes, and black holes and normal matter are made of “black-hole” universes, which, instead of expanding, shrinks from infinity to a single point, a reverse big-bang. Maybe gravity doesn’t PULL things together, maybe it DELETES space!
Also, in microspace, an object cannot be 1 or 0 on ALL the axes at any point in time. THAT is not possible.